Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)PE
Posts
64
Comments
1,626
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • That's great! I didn't say he was wrong. But he's only one authority. At best, I should tentatively accept his conclusions while seeking a consensus among many in his field, and, better, at his level.

    The appropriate response to an authority is other authorities. An even better response is a consensus of authorities. And even then, a consensus can be wrong, and so we should accept their conclusions as the best explanation until additional evidence is uncovered the is definitive. I mean, you should know this, being high IQ, well educated, and all.

  • You think following the science is opposing the transgender movement?

    No.

    Evidence based medicine is the best approach. Now studies need to follow this to generate the evidence.

    Interesting take given the conservative stance on masks during the pandemic. The evidence for masks as nuanced and complicated, and yet, conservative insisted masks were wholly ineffective, which is just false.

    In other words, I think "evidenced based medicine" is instrumental rather than a guiding principle for conservatives.

    That's why I said this study still doesn't mean anyone should oppose the transgender movement.

    I was shocked at the changes that were happening in the past as they defied previous studies and evidence based medicine.

    Isn't that the conclusion of this study? The evidence is largely inconclusive and it's not certain.

  • Rothbard is right to say that the equalization of human beings is horrifying precisely because it ignores the reality that while we are equal in our humanity (that is, we are all equally human), we are not equal in our attributes: “The horror we all instinctively feel at these stories is the intuitive recognition that men are not uniform, that the species, mankind, is uniquely characterized by a high degree of variety, diversity, differentiation; in short, inequality.” From a natural-rights libertarian perspective, egalitarianism amounts to a “revolt against nature” regardless of the label attached to it.

    Conservatives, square this circle for me: how do you recognize and praise the innate inequalities of humanity's attributes, while somehow believing in the equality of "humaneness"? Wtf does that even mean?

    Given those premises, a more honest position, as I interpret it, would actually align more with the intellectual far right, asserting that: if it is natural for us to be unequal in our attributes as humans, then to the degree that those attributes make us more human relative to the beasts of the natural world, they should also indicate a relative hierarchy of humanity.

  • Well, you know, when churches advocate for the misanthropic "pro-life" position that leaves women enduring near-death experiences from a biologically failed pregnancy, or just denies them the rights they've come to enjoy over the last several decades, it's a wonder why church should be cool.

    And it's not like these ignorant young men are any more religious. Their religiosity is purely performative, so much bombast, so little substance.

  • Even if the source is legit, it boils down to 'gay people told flag-wearing patriots they felt uncomfortable having them around".

    Like...so what? Why does this matter in the first place? The Borderline Dance team left to play into the persecution fetish of conservatives.